Like my thread on Medieval Books, I thought I might try to keep track of my thoughts on the various books on Ancient coins I have read. While these are not as numerous as the Medieval books, I would be happy for others to chime in (as they have done on the medieval book review post). I would just ask that we try to keep things to a similar format for consistency. Clare Rowan, From Caesar to Augustus (c. 49 BC-AD 14): Using Coins as Sources. Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World. Series EditorAndrew Meadows. Cambridge: University Press, 2019. ISBN: 978-1107675698 Cost: $24.99 Grade: A This book is a little gem on the historical background of many coins issued during the intriguing years between the rise of Julius Caesar and the reign of Augustus. Clare Rowan clearly explains how the various coins issued during this time of transition were used as a method of spreading messages and communicating with the Roman people. One of the strengths of the text is that Rowan provides a clear image of most of the coins she discusses, and those which are not pictured are referenced to their Crawford, RIC, or RPC number (complete with URL addresses for online versions of Crawford and RIC hosted by the ANS). The text is easily approachable, and it is also affordable! The purpose of the book is to act as a guide for Scholars of the late republic/early empire to utilize coins as evidence, and to be able to understand the symbolism and historical context of many of these coins. Rowan includes the basics, such as how coins were produced, and how they were used in daily life, but does not belabor these points to where they might be viewed as tedious to someone more accustomed to numismatic research. The appendixes contain a glossary of numismatic terms, Latin abbreviations, and explanation of both Greek and Roman denominations, and a timeline of events. The book is a handy guide for doing exactly what the subtitle states it is: using coins as sources. It assumes the reader is already familiar with the events that took place. While I highly recommend the book, I do have some slight criticisms. The text is sometimes conversational in tone; particularly in the first chapter. This clears up and becomes more formal later in the book, but this could be just a personal preference. Along the same lines, I find the MLA citation style annoying, but again, this is personal preference. Perhaps more concerning is that the images of the coins are all said to be 2x their actual size to allow for better visuals of the coins. This is nice, but no mention of the actual size of the coins is given (excepting provincial bronze coins where the denomination is unknown). Likewise, the weight of the coins pictured is not given. Perhaps this is because the specific coins shown are only meant to be representational of the type, and as we know weights on ancient coins aren’t necessarily consistent. The book also seemed to end abruptly with no real conclusion. While I may have a few criticisms, they are very minor. The book is an excellent little window into the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Empire, and I would highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in Roman coins, or Roman history.
I have this book and recommend it wholeheartedly. Thanks for the excellent review. I prefer APA to MLA, but as you say that is a personal preference. I do not mind the style. I find that the conversational tone can draw you in to become more involved with the text. As an academic I have read far too many papers and books that were deliberately formal and yet were still poorly written. At least this one involves the use of considerable skill with the written language. Speaking as a coin geek I would have liked the size and weight of the coins pictured, but I really appreciate the detail and historical perspective given for each coin discussed. The book has a few quirks but it is an excellent read. I hope to use examples from it in an upcoming lecture. Thanks again for the review.
Thanks for the review!! Sounds like I'd enjoy this book very much. After having written this post, I'd be curious to know what she says about the Caesar elephant...
Sear, David R. Roman Coins and Their Values. The Millennium Edition. (London: Spink, 2000-2014). Volume I, The Republic and Twelve Caesars, 280 BC—AD 96. ISBN: 190204035X Price: $90.00 Volume II, The Accession of Nerva to the Overthrow of the Severan Dynasty, AD 96–AD 235. ISBN: 1902040457 Price: $110.00 Volume III, The 3rd Century Crisis and Recovery, AD 235–285 ISBN: 1902040694 Price: $85.00 Volume IV, The Tetrarchies and the Rise of the House of Constantine, AD 284–337 ISBN: 978-1907427077 Price: $85.00 Volume V, The Christian Empire: The Later Constantinian Dynasty and the House of Valentinian and Theodosius and their Successors, Constantine II to Zeno, AD 337–491 ISBN: 978-1907427459 Price: $85.00 Series Grade: B- I made the decision to lump all of the Sear volumes into a single review, since they are all a product of the same author, and thus praise and criticism is (for the most part) applicable to all volumes. As many of you know, this series of books began as a single volume published in 1964, and then revised multiple times with the last single volume released in 1988. The ‘Millenium’ edition (which is reviewed here) was intended to be a further revision, splitting the book into two volumes. However, it is clear that Sear did not foresee his work blossoming into the five volumes that it eventually became (as evidence by each preface stating that only one more additional volume would be needed). In many ways the five volume set is useful as it is more complete, but the unintentional expansion of the series is also the cause of many of the criticisms I have. For those unfamiliar, Sear’s books are a catalogue of ancient Roman numismatics. It is by no means complete, and Sear acknowledges this, but it is fairly comprehensive (as best as I can tell - you all know I am more a medievalist). But the comprehensive nature of the catalogue seems to bear fruit in the later volumes when Sear seems to have finally given in to it being a multi-volume work. The first volume (covering the Republic and the ‘Twelve Caesars’) feels like it is missing a lot, and perhaps this is simply because Sear acknowledged that he would not cover the coins of the Social Wars (since these issues were not technically Roman, pg. 115). And though I am not a specialist in Roman coins, I have a few coins that were covered in the first or second volume which Sear lacks a record. However, I can easily find a catalogue reference to any of my later Roman coins, despite any strange oddity. The introduction is a bit frustrating, as it is meant to be an introduction to the entirety of Roman coin production, and not targeted to a particular volume. I again believe this to be a product of the unintentional growth of the project. Because of the wide scope of the introduction (which is repeated practically verbatim in each volume, and at 74 pages in length takes up a substantial part of each book), very little is included on Republican coinage, and the focus seems to be more on the imperial side. As such, the section on dating later imperial coins is pointless to the reader of Volume 1. However, if a new collector were to come to these volumes with the sole purpose of focusing on the reign of one or two emperors (and thus would only need one volume), then it is a nice touch to have the overarching history of Roman coins. The books shine on their usability however. With a little practice, it is easy to find a record of most coins (provided they are included). Once someone is able to determine the emperor of their coin, it is a simple matter of using the glossary in the back to find where the emperor is in the book, matching up the obverse legend and design with the key, then finding the appropriate reverse (ordered by denomination, then legend alphabetically). This works particularly well for the imperial coinage, but is not quite as easy for Republican coinage which is more reliant on visual styles than legends. Each of the emperors has a short biographical introduction which also includes their contribution to the coinage. These are easily digestible for learning about a single coin, but can get rather repetitive for some of the later emperors if you happen to read everything through like a regular book (as I did). Certain coins also have additional background information after its catalogue number, although there is a frustrating tendency to not picture the coins which have the interesting background stories (and then no background information given for the coins which are pictured). This has been my largest complaint about these volumes, frankly. Let us SEE the really interesting ones which the author has deemed worthy of extra written attention! Likely the reason most people own a copy of these books is the price. At between $60 and $80 a volume (used; the prices quoted above are for new copies ordered from Mr. Sear’s website), this is a more budget friendly catalogue than the more complete Roman Imperial Coinage series (considering there are fewer volumes, and RIC doesn’t include Republican coins). I am assuming that at the time the first edition was published in 1964, the inclusion of values for the coins was considered more important (as if it were the ‘Red Book’ for Roman coins), but this seems an unnecessary inclusion today, as it would be nearly impossible to keep this current in book form. But, ‘And Their Values’ is in the title, so the precedent must stay. While I have given this series a B-, let me say there are some very useful and positive aspects about it (as mentioned above). While I was initially hesitant to use Sear as my home catalogue on Roman coins, I have found that these books fit my needs just fine. But, if the first two volumes were expanded into two volumes each, and a more focused introduction was provided for each volume, I would have no qualms putting this series in the ‘A’ category.
And for the sake of honesty, I still have 50 pages left of Volume V to read, but I started on these things in April and have already made up my mind.
There is one more 'factor' I believe needs to be addressed in any book review or, fo that matter, in any evaluation of anything. That is how this, the reviewed item, compares to other options to gain the included knowledge, enjoyment or any other form of positive benefit. There are some subjects just too complex to be handled in one book or one series so we need to take care when criticizing units for failing to do the impossible. Sear, RIC and any other book known to me on the announced subject has trouble justifying itself against what is available free on the Internet in the form of websites like those of CNG and the British Museum and discussion groups not the least of which is Coin Talk. I have to rank Sear volumes 1 and 2 (I have never touched 3-5) a bit higher because my aging fingers enjoy the print on paper format. I get a bit more good from my collection several hundred old (pre Internet) auction catalogs but those pale when compared to the searchable online references and being able to bounce questions off of people including real pros like Barry Murphy and Curtis Clay or amateurs with a clue. That last group might just include YOU. My question, then, is what does Sear provide me that justifies ~$400 spent at the bookstore? My best answer is 'Fun'. I still enjoy books. My grade: B. ...and you?
Peter Thonemann. The Hellenistic World: Using Coins as Sources. Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World. Series Editor Andrew Meadows. Cambridge: University Press, 2015. ISBN: 978-1107451759 Cost: $33.99 Grade: B+ This was the first book written in the ‘Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World’ series published with the ANS (I reviewed the second book above). A third volume was released earlier this year, and a fourth should be coming out in a few months. Like the other volume, this book has some wonderful little insights into coinage into the Hellenistic world, and is a book on the history of the coins, not a collecting catalogue. While I appreciate the small chapters which make The Hellenistic World easy to read in small chunks before bed, it didn’t have quite the same feel of a unified work as Rowan’s book. This is probably a factor of the wide scope of the work; it would be difficult to give each area of the Hellenistic world the author’s full attention in just 230 pages. Thonemann even acknowledges this at the beginning of the chapter on civic identities that he would only focus on the cities of Asia Minor (which gives the reader the impression that this is his area of expertise). Nonetheless, there is a lot of good insights into the collective nature of the Hellenistic world as seen through both both unified coinage, and at the same time the various cities independent identities based on their localized issues. This is an area of numismatics I know little about, so it was nice to see a broad approach taken, and many different coinages discussed (rather than it being a huge run-down of Alexander Tetradrachms of various small differences).
Faintich, Marshall. Astronomical Symbols on Ancient and Medieval Coins. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2008. ISBN: 978-0786469154 Cost: $29.95 Grade: C Since this book covers both Ancient and Medieval coins, I have decided to post this review under both of my book review threads. If you read it in one, don’t bother with the other as they are the same. However, the book focuses mostly on Medieval coins, with what appears to be a previous article or two written on Ancient coins interspersed. The reasoning given for this was because of the ability to calculate astronomical phenomenon to a greater degree of certainty in the Medieval period. I am conflicted on this book (and hence the middling grade). Let me begin with the good qualities, and then end with my criticism. I think Faintich has tackled a subject which absolutely needs to be discussed more, particularly in the realm of Medieval coinage. It is all too easy for us in the modern age to ignore the night sky, or view astronomical phenomenon as merely curiosities, but these were very much viewed as important omens in the world for people in the past. Faintich’s expertise in Astronomy, and use of computer models to ascertain when eclipses occurred in the past (primarily the Medieval past), thus brings in the necessary technical information to help confirm Astronomical symbols present on coins. This is best shown in instances where a coin has a clear astronomical symbol, and was issued after a relevant astronomical event which coincided with an important event. The example of the liberation of Thebes in 379 B.C., and the addition of a crescent moon to Theban coins following a partial eclipse in 380 (hence not a moon, but a partially obscured sun symbol), shows this book at its best. (pgs. 37-8) However, there are many flaws. Primarily, there is a lack of evidence to support much of the assertions made. While eclipses in particular can be determined through modeling, we can’t assume the people in the past always saw the eclipse (perhaps if there was a cloudy or rainy day), and so combining this with recorded sightings in the particular area of issue would make a stronger case. Faintich also seems to see an astronomical symbol is EVERY pellet, annulet, and mullet. While the first chapters attempt to make the connection between these design elements and celestial events, the evidence is lacking and shaky. So, subsequent chapters attempt to show the addition of annulets and pellets to every known celestial event, and any coin containing a pellet or annulet without a corresponding event is dismissed as an immobilized design. Faintich also favors the astronomical theories over older established theories with little other evidence to support his position. At times I felt the common refrain was “This old interpretation is incorrect, because of STARS.” The evidence is often stretched to fit the narrative as well. At times it felt as if portions of the book had been shared with historians or other numismatist who pointed out a flaw in the argument, and so Faintich attempted to change the history to fit the theory. Perhaps the most egregious example of this is the attempt to fit the supernova of 1054 with Edward the Confessor’s ‘martlet’ issue, stating that these birds are the ravens which foretold the end of English kingship (which is laughable because the tower fo London where the ravens are kept did not exist in Edward’s time). (pgs. 95-96) Another, though less offensive example, is explaining the Champagne deniers as actually a comet, rather than a comb on a field (and then turning the coin 90 degrees to make it look more like a comet, despite the usual trend of the cross in the inscription beginning at the top of the coin design). The reasoning for this was simply dismissing the ability of the people of Champagne for understanding the pun for over 300 years, and that the ‘field’ only referred to the field on the coin (whereas I would maintain it was an actual field in relation to farming). (Pg. 65) As such, this book has incredible potential, but I think it needed to be co-authored with an historian to help eliminate some of the shoddy theories. At one point I became so despondent that I decided to research the publisher to see if it was a vanity press (it’s not, but neither is it the most highly esteemed of academic presses). But some examples of clear astronomical design could be linked to coins which haven’t been yet discussed. In my brief search on the web, I did not see anyone make the connection between the Sundog witnessed by Edward IV at the Battle of Mortimer’s Cross, which was interpreted as his right to rule as king. While the event took place in 1461, the first coinage reform Edward performed as king was in 1464. Among his reforms was the introduction of a new denomination (the Angel) whose initial design portrays a large sunburst on the reverse (but is missing in subsequent issues). This is a much clearer astronomical symbol than just an annulet or a pellet. So, the general concept of the work is good, but I think the book suffers from far too much confirmation bias. A sundog (optical illusion where the sun appears in triplet in the sky), and the reverse of an Edward IV Angel issued in 1464 (SCBC 1967, image taken from the book)
Linda Kallet and John H. Kroll. The Athenian Empire: Using Coins as Sources. Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World. Series Editor Andrew Meadows. Cambridge: University Press, 2020. ISBN: 978-1107686700 Cost: $22.99 Grade: B+ Like Thonemann’s The Hellenistic World, the most recent volume in the ‘Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World’ is a nice overview of the topic of finances in the Athenian Empire, but doesn’t feel as polished as Rowan’s From Caesar to Augustus. Like other volumes in the series, the chapters are broken up into easily read chunks, and it is packed with great illustrations of coins relevant to the text. In particular, I liked how this work focused on the coinage of Athens and the various members of its ‘Arche’ as found throughout the Aegean. Since many catalogues of Greek coins follow a geographic organization, it is easy to forget that Athens had allied states in a wide variety of areas, and Athens’ economic policies affected those areas. Kallet and Kroll do well to bring in a variety of primary source material to aid in interpreting the evidence of coins. Most of this boils down to member states changing the weight standards of their coins and minting practices to fit with the large number of Athenian tetradrachms used in wider trade. Or, in the case of rebelling states, to change their the standards away from the Athenian model. There were a couple of small frustrations with this volume that I believe were not an issue in the previous volumes. I suspect the order of when material was covered was changed a number of times before the final publication. I say this because there were a number of times when a coin type would be mentioned, but would not be illustrated until a later chapter of the book (something previous volumes avoided). There was also at least one instance where an illustration number was given, for a picture that didn’t exist: page 87 refers the reader to figure 5.14 for an image of a coin from Salamis. Chapter 5 only has 10 illustrations (so no 5.14), and the coin in question was figure 4.13 on the following page. These are minor quibbles, but it did make reading and keeping track of the coins in question a little frustrating for someone who is not intimately familiar with Ancient Greek coins. Still, it was an enjoyable read with some good theories and insights on the role of coins in Athens and the member pole is of the Delian League/Athenian Empire.
Liv Mariah Yarrow, The Roman Republic to 49 BCE: Using Coins as Sources, Guides to the Coinage of the Ancient World, Series Editor Andrew Meadows (Cambridge: University Press, 2021). ISBN: 978-1107654709 Cost: $25.99 Grade: A It’s pretty clear that I like this series co-published by the ANS and Cambridge Universe Press. As the title states, this is a book about using coins as sources in History. So it is by no means a catalogue, but rather an entry point for scholars of the Roman Republic to incorporate numismatic evidence. As such, it does contain some general information on how coins were made and the minting process, and this particular volume gives an excellent summary at the end of available numismatic resources (many of which you all are probably already familiar with). This volume on the Roman Republic improves from the previous volume in being more cohesive, and providing the illustrations to the coins in line with when they were being discussed. Rarely did I have to jump back in the book to find an illustration, and I don’t recall any instance where I had to jump forward for a coin being discussed (as happened in some of the other volumes). Like the other volumes, the chapters are broken down into nice little chunks which can make it convenient for reading a bit before bed, but also for finding relevant information. The book is laid out thematically more so than chronologically, which might be my one complaint. However, a chronology is followed in each of the thematic areas. As for what is covered, there are four main chapters which have the alliterative titles of “Money, Monuments, Mutinies?, and Mobilization.” In practice, what this means is the first chapter covers the production of coins, why change in the money occurs, and how we use coins as evidence. The second chapter essentially covers the messaging used on the coins for celebrating Rome. The third contains messages of conflict, and the fourth messages meant to influence people. I’ll admit that the final three chapters melded a bit in my mind for their purpose, but I did only read bits and pieces over the course of a month. However, there were many fascinating little insights into events during Republican Rome and how they related to the coinage so much so that the book inspired a couple of purchases.
A. I love these reviews and have bought several books that I enjoy very much as a result. B. On the subject of the Sear books: I own BMC, Cohen and RIC and I use RIC very often and where volumes have been revised I will have both editions. I would certainly not say that I have mastered RIC as different volumes use a different approach to dealing with their subject and I spend more time with the coins of certain eras than others. I very seldom use Cohen and as much as I like owning it and intend to dig into it some day, I have never used BMC. Having said that, the books I generally reach for first when I get a new coin are Sear. Part of that is probably just familiarity, my first catalog on Roman coins was the 1974 edition of Sear that I picked up used for about $20 in the mid 80s, I loved that book and used to literally fall asleep reading it. I now own all five editions (I guess I collect coin books almost as much as coins). Another reason that I like to use the five volume 5th Edition is that the method of cataloging remains consistent throughout all the volumes, this is in radical contrast to RIC which is the product of many authors with different approaches over almost a century. With RIC you really do have to invest some time in learning to use them once you have invested a couple thousand dollars in buying them. With Sear you just start using it. I do not intend to make too much of this point, a smart monkey could learn to use RIC (I did after all), but it is a factor.
For the 5 volume set, I feel like Sear was much more thorough in the later volumes, and so I kind of wish for a revised version of the first two. The organization is useful for identification too. I only have one volume of RIC, and it feels like more hunting is needed.
I agree. For the later 3rd century and 4th century, every single variation at every mint seems to be listed for most emperors. For earlier emperors in the first and second centuries, a lot of types appear to be missing -- even including some that were listed in the earlier one-volume editions.
Yarrow's is not the kind of book that I tend to read straight through, but I've been dipping into it periodically and find it quite interesting. My only minor complaint is that the same numbering system seems to be used for sections, figures, and "boxes," so that one could have several different discussions or images all numbered (for example) "2.1.2," and, therefore, it's not always easy to find them, and to find the associated footnote references, etc. I also like the companion volume by Clare Rowan.
